#Gujarathighcourt Archives

10 Oct

Review of the evidence and in-depth justifications for the case’s merits at the time of granting bail should be avoided because they could harm the accused. Gujarat High Court Grants bail

Prime Legal

Blog #Gujarathighcourt, #IPC, bail

TITLE Rajput (Barad) Ranjeetsinh Agarsinh Versus State of Gujarat

Decided On September 21, 2023

16783 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr Hasmukh

INTRODUCTION-

The applicant accused has requested release on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the for the offences punishable under Sections 3007, 324, 323, 506 (2), 143, 147, 148, and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860, as well as Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act through the present application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The applicant claims that he has been wrongly implicated in the crime and that he has nothing to do with it. It is claimed that a dispute between neighbours led to a fight between women; however, the current applicant has been charged under section 149 of the IPC. The applicant was not even present at the scene of the incident, and he has not participated in the incident in any way or dealt any blows. Furthermore, the victim is no longer in danger, and there is nothing left to recover or learn about the current applicant, so a custodial interrogation is not required at this time. In addition, the applicant is accessible throughout the investigation and won’t resist justice. Given the foregoing, anticipatory bail may be granted to the applicant.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

Additional public prosecutor representing the respondent in court: Given the seriousness and nature of the offence, the state has opposed the granting of anticipatory bail. He claimed that the current applicant had assaulted the victim and violated section 149 of the IPC. The victim had injuries from a knife blow, and as the investigation was in its early stages, an incarcerated interrogation of the applicant was necessary. A thorough review of the evidence and in-depth justifications for the case’s merits at the time of granting bail should be avoided because they could harm the accused. The following factors have been taken into account.

(1) The applicant has not committed any overt acts;

(2) The applicant has not struck the victim;

(3) The victim is not in danger;

(4) Nothing has been recovered or found from the applicant;

(5) The offence is not punishable by life in prison or the death penalty;

asked to reject the current application “PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Steffi Desousa

10 Oct

The trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail, Gujarat High Court Grants bail

Prime Legal

Uncategorized #Gujarathighcourt

TITLE- Kirtalbhai Chaganbhai Rathva Versus State of Gujarat

Decided On September 21, 2023

15182 of 2023

INTRODUCTION-

The applicant accused has asked to be released on anticipatory bail in the event that he is arrested in connection with offences punishable under Sections 65(e), 65(a), and 116(b) of the Prohibition Act through the current application made pursuant to Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The applicant claims that they were wrongfully implicated in the crime. Nothing was found in the applicant’s conscious possession. The muddamal item is priced at Rs. 12960. The applicant doesn’t have any prior criminal history. He further argued that because of the nature of the allegations, a custodial interrogation is not required at this time. In addition, the applicant is accessible throughout the investigation and won’t resist justice. Given the foregoing, anticipatory bail may be granted to the applicant.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The state has opposed the granting of anticipatory bail, claiming that since the applicant’s home was where the illegal substance, muddamal, was discovered, the application cannot be taken into consideration.

It is equally required of the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously, and strictly in compliance with the fundamental principles outlined in a large number of decisions made by the Hon’ble Apex Court on the subject after hearing the learned advocate for the parties and reading the investigation papers. This would be sufficient to hold the defendant in judicial custody and consider the prosecution’s request for a police remand. It is made clear that the applicant, even if remanded to police custody, shall be released right away after the allotted time has passed, subject to the other terms of this anticipatory bail order.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgment

10 Oct

No active participation of the present applicant has been noticed as he has sublet the contract against the condition of contract, Gujarat High Court Grants bail

Prime Legal

Uncategorized #Gujarathighcourt

TITLE Hathiyabhai Dudhabhai Khunti Versus State of Gujarat

Decided On September 21, 2023

6544 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr Hasmukh

INTRODUCTION-

The applicant accused has asked to be released on anticipatory bail in the current application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, in the event that he is arrested in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act as well as Sections 406, 409, 120(b), 465, 467, and 471 of the Penal Code, 1860.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The applicant claims that because of the nature of the allegations, a custodial interrogation is not required at this time. In addition, the applicant is accessible throughout the investigation and won’t resist justice. A knowledgeable attorney for the applicant claims that the current applicant has been wrongfully accused of the crime. He is not responsible for the crime.

knowledgeable advocate has argued that the current applicant is an elderly man who has a contract for door-to-door delivery. He hasn’t broken any laws because the current applicant sublet the contract to a man named Rahul, who has since been taken into custody. It is asserted that there has been no collusion, abetting, or connivance with the accused. According to the argument, the only charge brought against the current applicant is that he had contact with a man named Asvin, who is accused of stealing the stock. It is further argued that nothing about the accused needs to be retrieved or found out.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

On behalf of the respondent, additional public prosecutor testified that anticipatory bail should not be granted due to the seriousness and nature of the crime. According to an expert APP, the current applicant is complicit in the current crime and the elaborate conspiracy that was hatched. According to the argument, essential commodities like wheat, rice, sugar, grammes, tuvar pulse, and groundnut oil worth Rs. 99,77,551/- are syphoned, and in this regard, an offence is registered following an investigation. It appears that the go-down keeper, Supervisor, and transporter were all complicit in this crime. The applicant is accused of conspiring with others after it is claimed that they stole the aforementioned sum and falsified the stock register and gate passes. It is well-established that among other circumstances, the factors to be taken into account when deciding whether to grant bail are (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable basis to believe that the accused had committed the crime; (ii) the nature and seriousness of the accusation; (iii) the severity of the punishment in the event of a conviction; (iv) the risk that the accused will flee or turn against them if granted bail; and (v) character, behaviour, means, and position

Written by- Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgment

8 Oct

The object of anticipatory bail is that a person should not be harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy the personal vendetta of the complainant. Gujarat High Court

Prime Legal

Blog #Gujarathighcourt

TITLE Chirag Prafulkumar Patel Versus State of Gujarat

Decided On September 21, 2023

2119 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr Hasmukh

INTRODUCTION-

The appellants fearing their arrest in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2), 143, and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860, as well as Section 3(2)(vi) of the Atrocity Act, have filed the current appeal under Section 14-A read with Section 18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989).

FACTS OF THE CASE

The appellants claim that the complainant filed the FIR as a counterblast since another complaint was made against the complainant’s brother, that no such incident occurred, and that the appellants were wrongfully implicated in the crime. On the other hand, the complainant’s brother had abused young girls in the fine arts class, and an incident related to this occurred. In an effort to cover their tracks, the girls made up the entire story and filed the complaint. After the current appellants’ initial complaint was submitted, the complaint was late in coming. There isn’t even a hint of an attempt to offend the community on the surface. No specific part is given to the current appellants in the omnibus claims against the accused parties.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

In contrast, the learned APP has vigorously opposed the current appeal and claimed that section 18 of the Atrocity Act forbids the consideration of the current appeal and that the current appellants are guilty of a prima facie offence. Regarding the claim that the current FIR is a counterblast to the complaint that the complainant’s brother filed, this is a matter of evidence and does not need to be addressed at this time because the FIR prima facie discloses the offence. As a result, it has been requested to dismiss the current appeal. Additionally, taking into account the claims made in the complaint, the appellants’ presence is necessary for the qualitative investigation, as well as custodial questioning. Due to this initial appearance of an active role on the part of the accused, a qualitative investigation is required.

The current appellants are accused of violating Sections 323, 504, 506(2), 143, and 149 of the Penal Code of 1860 as well as Section 3(2)(vi) of the Atrocity Act. Section 18 of the Atrocity Act forbids the use of discretion in the present appellants’ favour. After considering the aforementioned discussion, it can be concluded that the case at hand does not qualify for jurisdiction under Section 18 of the Atrocity Act because it is prima facie established that the present appellants were involved in the crime. Therefore, the current appeal is denied.

Written by- Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgment

8 Oct

A thorough review of the evidence and in-depth justifications regarding the case’s merits at the time of granting bail should be avoided because they could harm the accused. Gujarat High Court

Prime Legal

Blog #Gujarathighcourt

TITLE Chirag Mahendrabhai Patel Versus State of Gujarat

Decided On September 21, 2023

10512 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr Hasmukh

INTRODUCTION-

The applicant accused has requested release on anticipatory bail through this application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, in the event of his arrest in connection with offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120(b) of the Penal Code, 1860.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The applicant claims that he has been wrongly accused of the crime and has nothing to do with it. The applicant is alleged to not even be mentioned in the complaint. The fact that co-accused with similar roles have been released by the Sessions Court . A knowledgeable attorney for the applicant claims that given the nature of the allegations, a custodial interrogation is not required at this time.

In addition, the applicant is accessible throughout the investigation and won’t resist justice. Given the foregoing, anticipatory bail may be granted to the applicant.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The applicant is ready and willing to abide by all conditions, including the imposition of conditions with regard to the powers of the Investigating Agency to file an application before the appropriate Court for his remand, according to the applicant’s learned advocate, who is acting on instructions. He would also argue that the applicant accused may continue to have the option to contest the Investigating Agency’s application on the basis of merits after it has been filed.

The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail due to the nature and seriousness of the offence, according to the learned additional public prosecutor who appeared on behalf of the respondent.

This would be sufficient to hold the defendant in judicial custody and consider the prosecution’s request for a police remand. It is made clear that the applicant, even if remanded to police custody, shall be released right away after the allotted time has passed, subject to the other terms of this anticipatory bail order.

Written by- Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgement

1 2 3 … 19